8th July, 2008

The weight of scientific evidence tells us that Australians are facing risks of

damaging climate change. The risk can be substantially reduced by strong and

early action by all major economies. Without that action, it is probable that

Australians, over the 21st century and beyond, will experience disruption in their

prosperity and enjoyment of life, and to longstanding patterns in their lives.

Chapter 2

The central policy issue facing the Review can be stated simply: what extent

of global mitigation, with Australia playing its proportionate part, provides the

greatest excess of gains from reduced risks of climate change over costs of

mitigation?

Answering the question draws on our capacity to model conventional

economic effects, to measure and to value uncertain outcomes, to value effects

that are not felt through markets for goods, services or factors of production,

and to value costs and benefits incurred and received by different people at

different times.

This chapter puts forward a framework for looking at these issues. It favours

transparent reporting of the premises of subsequent discussion, and the

introduction of analysis of the sensitivity of outcomes to variables.

The reserves and resources of fossil fuels are finite, which means that their

costs are likely to rise over time. This reduces the costs of mitigation, which

brings forward an inevitable eventual adjustment away from fossil fuels.

Chapter 3

The Review takes as its starting point, on the balance of probabilities and not

as a matter of belief, the majority opinion of the Australian and international

scientific communities that human activities resulted in substantial global

warming from the mid 20th century, and that continued growth in greenhouse

gas concentrations caused by human-induced emissions would generate high

risks of dangerous climate change.

A natural carbon cycle converts the sun’s energy and atmospheric carbon

into organic matter through plants and algae, and stores it in the earth’s crust

and oceans. Stabilisation of carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere

requires the rate of greenhouse gas emissions to fall to the rate of natural

sequestration.

There are many uncertainties around the mean expectations from the science,

with the possibility of outcomes that are either more benign—or catastrophic.

Chapter 4

Greenhouse gas emissions have grown rapidly in the early 21st century. In the

absence of strong mitigation, strong growth is expected to continue for the next

two decades and in only somewhat moderated rates beyond.

So far, the biggest deviations from earlier expectations are in China. Economic

growth, the energy intensity of that growth, and the emissions intensity of energy

use are all at, or above, projections embodied in these earlier expectations.

China has recently overtaken the United States as the world’s largest emitter,

and, in an unmitigated future, would account for about 35 per cent of global

emissions in 2030.

Other developing countries are also becoming major contributors to global

emissions growth, and will take over from China as the main growing sources

a few decades from now. Under the unmitigated case, developing countries

would account for about 80 per cent of emissions growth over the next two

decades and more after that.

High petroleum prices will not necessarily slow emissions growth, because of

the ample availability of large resources of high-emissions fossil fuel alternatives,

notably coal.

Chapter 5

As a result of past actions, the world is already committed to a level of warming

that could lead to high-consequence climate change outcomes.

Extreme climate responses are not always considered in the assessment

of climate change impacts due to the high level of uncertainty and a lack of

understanding of how they work. However, the potentially catastrophic

consequences of such events means it is vitally important that the current

knowledge of these outcomes is incorporated in the decision-making process.

Continued high emissions growth with no mitigation action carries high risks.

These risks would be reduced by ad hoc mitigation, but remain high for some

elements. Ambitious global mitigation would reduce the risks further, but some

systems may still suffer critical damage.

There are advantages in aiming for an ambitious global mitigation target in

order to avoid some of the high-consequence impacts of climate change.

Chapter 6

Australia’s dry and variable climate has been a challenge for the continent’s

inhabitants since human settlement.

Temperatures in Australia rose slightly more than the global average in the

second half of the 20th century. Streamflow has reduced significantly in the

water catchment areas of the southern regions of Australia. Some of these

changes are attributed by the mainstream science to human-induced global

warming.

Effects of future warming on rainfall patterns are difficult to predict because

of interactions with complex regional climate systems. Average expectations

are for significant drying in southern Australia, with risk of much greater drying.

The mainstream Australian science estimates that there may be a 10 per cent

chance of a small increase in average rainfall, accompanied by much higher

temperatures and greater variability in weather patterns.

Chapter 7

This chapter provides a taste of conclusions from detailed studies of Australian

impacts. These studies are available in full on the Review’s website.

Growth in emissions is expected to have a severe and costly impact on

agriculture, infrastructure, biodiversity and ecosystems in Australia.

There will also be flow-on effects from the adverse impact of climate change

on Australia’s neighbours.

These impacts would be significantly reduced with ambitious global

mitigation.

The hot and dry ends of the probability distributions, with 10 per cent chance

of realisation, would be profoundly disruptive.

Chapter 8

Australia’s per capita emissions are the highest in the OECD and among

the highest in the world. Emissions from the energy sector would be the

main component of an expected quadrupling of emissions by 2100 without

mitigation.

Australia’s energy sector emissions grew rapidly between 1990 and 2005.

Total emissions growth was moderated, and kept more or less within our Kyoto

Protocol target, by a one-off reduction in land clearing.

Relative to other OECD countries, Australia’s high emissions are mainly the

result of the high emissions intensity of energy use, rather than the high energy

intensity of the economy or exceptionally high per capita income.

The high emissions intensity of Australian energy use is mainly the result

of our reliance on coal for electricity. This is a recent phenomenon: Australian

and OECD average emissions intensity of primary energy supply were similar

in 1971.

Chapter 9

The joint Garnaut–Treasury reference case suggests that, in the absence of

climate change or costs from its mitigation, from 2005 to 2100, the Australian

population will more than double to nearly 47 million, per capita output will almost

quadruple, and economic output will expand by over 700 per cent.

Over the same period, the reference case sees global population increasing

by about 40 per cent and stabilising, and then starting to decline late in the

second half of the century. Global output increases by about 15 times, mostly

in the developing world, led by the large Asian developing economies—China,

India and Indonesia.

The median temperature and rainfall outcomes for Australia from climate

change with unmitigated growth in global emissions—particularly from impacts

on infrastructure, agriculture and international terms of trade—may see GDP

fall from the reference case by around 4.8 per cent, household consumption by

5.4 per cent and real wages by 7.8 per cent by 2100.

This would represent significant reduction of economic growth and welfare

from what it would have been in the absence of climate change.

These are not the total costs of climate change. Nor can these costs be

avoided entirely by mitigation.

Chapter 10

An examination of the range of impacts through market processes with median

expectations of climate impacts suggests that the modelling covers 65 to

85 per cent of total market impacts. Non-market impacts of climate change

would be valued highly by Australians, but are not quantified in the draft report.

The insurance value of some lower probability outcomes could be extremely

costly. An assessment of more extreme low rainfall outcomes for Australia, near

the 10th percentile of the distribution, suggests that GDP costs could be in the

order of 8 per cent in 2100, with household consumption of around 9.1 per cent

in 2100, and reduction in real wages of around 14.8 per cent relative to the

reference case.

Extreme economic disruption in developing countries from climate change

could exacerbate severe economic effects on Australia.

The extent to which Australian mitigation is justified will be assessed by

analysing the benefits of avoided climate change in the modelling and in sectors

not subject to formal modelling, the insurance value of mitigation in relation to

lower probability but high cost outcomes, and the value to Australians of nonmarket

impacts avoided by mitigation. The application of a range of approaches

to discounting for time will be brought into the formulation of advice on whether

and how much mitigation is justified.

Chapter 11

Climate change is a global problem that requires a global solution.

Mitigation effort is increasing around the world, but too slowly to avoid

high risks of dangerous climate change. The recent and projected growth in

emissions means that effective mitigation by all major economies will need to

be stronger and earlier than previously considered necessary.

The existing international framework is inadequate, but a better architecture

will only come from building on, rather than overturning, established efforts.

Domestic, bilateral and regional efforts can all help to accelerate progress

towards an effective international agreement.

Chapter 12

Only a comprehensive international agreement can provide the wide country

coverage and motivate the coordinated deep action that effective abatement

requires.

Global emissions reduction goals can best be defined in terms of emissions

trajectories and multiyear budgets.

The only realistic chance of achieving the depth, speed, and breadth of action

that is now required from all major emitters is explicit allocation of internationally

tradable emissions rights across countries. For practical reasons, allocations

across countries will need to move gradually towards a population basis.

All developed and high-income countries, and China, need to be subject

to binding emissions limits from the beginning of the new commitment period

in 2013.

Other developing countries—but not the least developed—should be

required to accept one-sided targets below business as usual.

Chapter 13

International trade in permits lowers the global cost of abatement, allows greater

flexibility for developed countries in meeting their commitments, and provides a

financial incentive for developing countries to take on commitments.

Trade in emissions rights is greatly to be preferred to trade in offset credits,

which should be restricted.

A global agreement on minimum commitments to investment in lowemissions

new technologies is required to ensure an adequate level of funding

of research, development and commercialisation. Australia’s commitment to

support of research, development and commercialisation of low-emissions

technology would be up to about $2.8 billion in 2007—or more than $3 billion

per annum by the time the proposed International Low Emissions Technology

Commitment took effect in 2013.

An International Adaptation Assistance Commitment would provide

new adaptation assistance to developing countries that join the global

mitigation effort.

Early sectoral agreements would seek to ensure that the main trade-exposed,

emissions-intensive industries face comparable carbon prices across the world.

These would include international civil aviation and shipping.

A WTO agreement is required to support international mitigation agreements

and to constrain unilateral action against countries thought to be doing too little

on mitigation.

Chapter 14

Australia’s mitigation effort is our contribution to keeping alive the possibility of

an effective global agreement on mitigation.

Any effort prior to effective, comprehensive global agreement should be

short, transitional, and directed at achievement of global agreement.

The emissions trading scheme is the central instrument of Australian

mitigation.

A well-designed, broadly based emissions trading scheme has important

advantages over other market-based arrangements (such as carbon taxes

and hybrid schemes). In particular, it is able to accommodate more easily

international trade to lower mitigation costs and to facilitate developing country

participation in international agreements. However a carbon tax would be better

than a heavily compromised emissions trading scheme.

The role of complementary measures is to lower the cost of meeting the

emissions reduction trajectories of the emissions trading scheme by correcting

for market failures.

Once a fully operational emissions trading scheme is in place, the Mandatory

Renewable Energy Target will not address any additional market failures. Its

potentially distorting effects can be phased out naturally as the emissions

trading scheme takes up the load of encouraging low-emissions technologies.

Chapter 15

The emissions trading scheme will issue permits for greenhouse gas emissions

up to limits and release them in line with the scheme’s emissions reduction

trajectories. Trade will move permits to entities for whom they have most value.

The trajectories will be firm for five years, and indicative through to mid century.

Permits should be sold through a competitive process.

The more sectors included in the emissions trading scheme, the more

efficiently costs will be shared across the economy. The transport sector should

be included.

While there are advantages in moving directly to an unconstrained scheme,

2010–12 could be a transition period. If there were a transition period, the

Kyoto Protocol would define Australia’s emissions reduction trajectory and

permits would be sold at a low fixed price. These years would be used to pursue

effective international sectoral agreements, en route to a global agreement.

Unlimited hoarding of permits will be allowed, and the independent regulator,

the Independent Carbon Bank, will be able to lend permits within five-year

periods. No hoarding of 2010–2012 permits could be allowed if there were

price constraints in a transition period.

International linking will play an important role in the scheme, with fewer

constraints in later years within an international agreement.

Chapter 16

Basic research and development of low-emissions technologies is an international

public good, requiring high levels of expenditure by developed countries.

Australia should make a proportionate contribution alongside other developed

countries, in its areas of national interest and comparative research advantage.

This would require a large increase in Australian commitments to research,

development and commercialisation of low-emissions technologies, to over

$3 billion per annum.

There are externalities associated with private investment in commercialising

new, low-emissions technologies.

To achieve an effective commercialisation effort on a sufficiently early time

scale, an Australian system of matching grants should be available where private

investors demonstrate externalities, low emissions and innovation.

A new research council should be charged with elevating, coordinating and

targeting Australia’s effort in low-emissions research.

Chapter 17

There is a risk that network infrastructure market failures relating to electricity

grids and carbon dioxide transport systems could increase the cost of adjustment

to a low-emissions economy.

The role of the proposed national transmission planner should be expanded to

include a long-term economic approach to transmission planning and funding.

A similar planning approach is necessary to ensure that network infrastructure

failures do not unnecessarily delay deployment of large-scale carbon capture

and storage.

The Building Australia Fund should be extended to cover energy

infrastructure.

There is a case for special feed-in tariffs for household electricity generation

and co-generation. The case can be quantified by reference to timing and

transmission considerations.

A well-integrated national energy network with the capacity to cope with

potentially large shifts in flows will allow for structural change and the smoothing

of shocks following the introduction of an emissions trading scheme and recent

fuel price volatility.

Chapter 18

There are potentially large and early gains from better utilisation of known

technologies, goods and services, including energy efficiency and low-emissions

transport options.

Externalities in the provision of information and principal–agent issues inhibit

the use of distributed generation and energy-saving opportunities in appliances,

buildings and vehicles.

Some combination of information, regulation and restructuring of contractual

relationships can address many of the market failures blocking optimal utilisation

of proven technologies.

Chapter 19

Low-income households spend much higher proportions of their incomes than

other households on emissions-intensive products.

The direct price effects of the emissions trading scheme will be regressive.

The effects will fall heavily on low-income households, so the credibility, stability,

efficiency and longevity of the scheme require the correction of these regressive

effects by other measures.

Correction of income effects in the lower half of the distribution is also

necessary for anti-inflationary reasons through the early years of the scheme.

Approximately half the proceeds from the sale of all permits could be

allocated to households.

Part of the payments to households could assist energy efficiency

adjustments. The bulk could be passed through the tax and social security

systems, with heavier energy efficiency commitments in the early years. The

Henry taxation review could consider these issues.

Chapter 20

Australians have become accustomed to low and stable energy prices. This

is being challenged by rapidly rising capital costs and large price increases for

natural gas and black coal. These cost effects will be much larger than the

impact of the emissions trading scheme for some years.

Australia is exceptionally well endowed with energy options. Support for

research and development and for structural change in transmission infrastructure

will allow Australia’s natural endowments in renewable energy to be efficiently

brought to account.

The interaction of the emissions trading scheme with support for research,

development and commercialisation will assist transition to a near-zero emissions

energy sector by mid century.

The future for coal-based electricity generation, both domestic and exported,

and for mitigation in developing Asia depends on carbon capture and storage

becoming commercially effective. Australia should lead a major international

effort towards the testing and deployment of this technology.

Specific support for emissions-reducing investment in the coal-based

electricity-generating regions is warranted, for smooth energy sector adjustment

and established generating regions.

 

4th July, 2008

Australians are facing risks of damaging climate change. Without strong and early action by

Australia and all major economies we are likely to face severe and costly impacts on Australia’s

prosperity and enjoyment of life, according to the Garnaut Climate Change Review’s Draft Report,

released today.

Speaking at the National Press Club in Canberra, Professor Ross Garnaut said that by 2050,

unmitigated climate change on middle of the road outcomes would mean major declines in

agricultural production across much of the country, including a 50 per cent reduction in irrigated

agriculture in the Murray-Darling Basin. By 2100, irrigated agriculture in the Murray Darling Basin

would decline by 92 per cent.

Early economic modelling results of readily measurable unmitigated climate change for middle of the

road outcomes on temperatures and decline in rainfall – indicate that climate change would wipe off

around 4.8 per cent of Australia’s projected GDP, around 5.4 per cent of projected household

consumption, and 7.8 per cent from real wages by 2100.

“These readily measurable costs are only part of the story. There are also conventional economic

effects that are not currently measurable, the possibility of much larger costs from extreme outcomes,

and costs that aren’t manifested through markets,” said Professor Garnaut.

The full economic modelling results, to be released in a Supplementary Draft Report in August, will

help complete the picture for Australians, by comparing the costs and benefits of climate change

mitigation. This will inform the Review’s consideration of emission reduction trajectories and targets.

The Final Report will be released in September.

Professor Garnaut said that the climate change impacts would be significantly reduced with strong

global mitigation.

“Australia needs to play its full part in the international effort if global mitigation is to have a chance.

The first step is to take action as part of the developed world, with a view to bringing in developing

countries – first of all China – on the earliest possible timetable,” he said.

“Australia would be hurt more than other developed countries by unmitigated climate change, and

we therefore have an interest in encouraging the strongest feasible global effort. We are running out

of time for effective global action, and it is important that we play our full part in nurturing the

remaining chance.

“We will delude ourselves should we choose to take small actions that create an appearance of

action, but which do not solve the problem. Such an approach would risk the integrity of our market

economy and political processes to no good effect,” said Professor Garnaut.

“Australians are well placed to deal with the challenges of this major economic reform. As with all

economic reform, mitigation policy must be forward-looking. Policy interventions and the use of

public and private resources should focus on improving future economic prospects rather than

reacting to past decisions”, said Professor Garnaut.

The Draft Report provides the Review’s suggestions on the design of the emissions trading scheme

(ETS). Professor Garnaut reiterated his support for the ETS to cover as many sectors as practicable.

“The more sectors included in the ETS, the more efficiently costs will be shared across the economy.

Transport should be included,” said Professor Garnaut.

The Draft Report advocates the full auctioning of emissions permits and the return of all revenue to

households and business.

“The cost to consumers of rising energy and petrol prices, can be balanced through payments to

households, while preserving price incentives to reduce emissions,” he said.

The Report proposes that half the proceeds from the sale of all permits is allocated to households,

around 30 per cent provided for structural adjustment needs for business (including any payments to

TEEIIs), and the remaining 20 per cent allocated to research and development and the

commercialisation of new technologies.

“The proceeds from the ETS should be allocated for purposes that will help Australia adjust to a lowemissions

future,” said Professor Garnaut.

“A massive increase – reaching $3 billion per annum – is required in Australia’s commitment to lowemissions

technology research, development and commercialisation,” he said.

The Draft Report states that it would be in Australia’s interest to find out as soon as possible whether

there can be a low-emissions future for coal, and to support rapid deployment of commercially

promising technologies. This follows from Australia’s role as the world’s largest exporter of coal and

the central place of coal in growth in emissions from Asian developing countries.

“Australia has the opportunity to play a leadership role in funding and co-ordinating a major global

effort to develop and deploy carbon capture and storage technologies, and to transfer those

technologies to developing countries,” said Professor Garnaut.

“Additional mitigation policies should only be undertaken where they will lower the overall cost to the

economy, by correcting market failures,” he said.

Professor Garnaut said that he supported the phase-out of the Mandatory Renewable Energy Target,

once the unconstrained ETS was fully operational.

“The Review’s first aim is to lay out the issues for policy choice in a transparent way. We will have

done our job if Australian governments and the community make their choices in full knowledge of

the consequences of their decisions,” said Professor Garnaut.

Professor Garnaut will host public forums on the Draft Report in a number of cities around Australia

between 7-11 July 2008. For more information visit www.garnautreview.org.au

3rd July, 2008

All companies should be considering how best to manage the

carbon footprint risks in their supply chains, even if the new

National Greenhouse Energy Reporting (NGER) requirements,

which kick off today, don’t yet apply to them.

As a guide, if a company has an annual gas bill greater than

$3-4 million or an electricity bill of more than $13-18 million a

year, then it will most likely be required to collect greenhouse

gas emissions data from today. In addition, if a facility’s gas bill

is more than $800,000 or its electricity bill is above $3 million a

year, then it is also included in the new regulations.

Large businesses have no choice but to start complying with the

NGER legislation, warn Rob Hogarth, KPMG’s environmental and

sustainability partner, and Peter Liddell, KPMG’s risk advisory

services partner.

But you’re certainly not off the hook if your company or its

facilities aren’t required to collect this data yet.

Hogarth warns: “Large businesses should be well on their way in

accounting for carbon and they will be looking for ways to reduce

their consumption or pass on the costs, which means there will

be significant negotiations up and down the supply chain. And,

companies that haven’t determined their own carbon footprint

or who don’t understand their consumption patterns will find

themselves in a poor negotiating position.

“Conversely, companies down the supply chain that can

show they have a minimal impact on the environment may

find themselves in a supplier of choice position as large

businesses pursue opportunities to make their products as

green as possible.”

In particular, businesses that are likely to be included in the

second tier of the NGER (emitting greater than 87.5 kilotons

of greenhouse gas or producing/consuming more than 350

terajoules of energy) will have to report from 1 July 2009 and

should start preparing themselves now.

Liddell says: “Second-tier companies should be measuring their

emissions this year, as it will put them in a stronger position to

deal with large businesses as they will be preparing information

concurrently. It will also enable them to test and refine their

systems before reporting becomes mandatory. In the long-term,

this will be the best option as the thresholds for reporting will be

progressively lowered over the next three years.

“Take action now or you might as well sit on your hands, because

you’ll never have the upper hand in negotiations if you don’t

understand your carbon position.”

 

Sourced from "The Boardroom Report"  http://www.companydirectors.com.au 

 

27th June, 2008

Electricity prices are expected to increase as of the 1^st of July for residential and small business customers on regulated tariffs in both Queensland and NSW. The expected increase in electricity prices comes after soaring energy prices across all resource commodities in the first quarter and strong domestic demand for energy is pushing recent price spikes further.   

NSW customers who are on a regulated tariff with Energy Australia and Integral Energy can expect to receive on average, an increase of up to 8.5 % in the price of electricity including the effects of inflation, whilst Country Energy customers can expect to receive a smaller increase of 4.8%.

The increase in electricity prices comes after IPART (Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal) announced that these increases are needed in order to sufficiently cover the cost incurred with selling electricity and to maintain and enhance investment in both the transmission and distribution of electricity.  

Queensland customers can expect to receive on average an increase of up to 5.38% from the 1^st July. The increase in electricity prices is calculated in accordance with the Queensland Competition Authority who use a Benchmark Retail cost index to ensure that increases in electricity prices reflect the true cost supplying electricity. The QCA have argued that the increase in electricity prices is needed in order to cover the increased cost associated with supplying electricity and expenditure on Queensland state electricity infrastructure. (Energex, Ergon and Powerlink).   

Victoria and South Australia Electricity prices are also expected to be on the increase however no reports have been released by the relevent tribunals over the expected increase amount.

Source: Chandara Lim, Retail Market Analyst, EnergyAction Analytics.

21st June, 2008

Regulated electricity prices for residential and small business customers will rise from 1 July 2008. Regulated prices will rise by an average of 8.5 per cent including the effects of inflation for customers of EnergyAustralia and Integral Energy. Customers of Country Energy on regulated retail prices will see an average increase of 4.8 percent. These increases comply with IPART’s determination of retail prices for 2007-2010 which was released in June 2007.

The 2007 determination allows the standard retailers to increase regulated electricity prices to provide for:

• Increased electricity purchase costs

• Increases in network charges to fund improvements network reliability

• Increased retail operating costs (principally due to the inclusion of the costs associated with acquiring customers in the competitive market), and

• Increased retail margins.

 

To reduce the increased retail margins being proposed by IPART, contact EnergyAction, on 02 9891 6911 today. 

16th June, 2008

New South Wales Premier Morris Iemma is being urged to postpone his electricity privatisation legislation, which looks set to be defeated when it is voted on in Parliament during the next fortnight.

A number of Government MPs opposed to privatisation are threatening to cross the floor, and the Opposition is also saying it will oppose the bill meaning the legislation will not pass through Parliament before it rises for its winter recess.

A spokeswoman for Morris Iemma says there are no plans to postpone the legislation, and says discussions with the Opposition are continuing.

But the MP for the Blue Mountains, Phil Koperberg, says the matter should not be debated in Parliament in the next session.

"I will be meeting tomorrow morning with my left colleagues ahead of Parliament," he said.

"I will be asking them to condone a small number of us going to see the Premier with a view, given how delicately this is poised, to contemplating at least postponing it to allow further negotiations to take place."

Mr Koperberg says he is confident a compromise can be reached.

"There is probably a solution to this if we hasten somewhat slower than we've been hastening thus far," he said.

A former Liberal MP, and the current head of the Sydney Chamber of Commerce, Patricia Forsythe, is urging the Opposition not play politics with the issue and to support the bill.

"We certainly hope that the Opposition won't be tempted by short term political pointscoring".

 

Source: Yahoo Business, http://au.biz.yahoo.com/080616/31/1sgnd.html 

13th June, 2008

Smart meters that tell consumers how much electricity they are using at any time of the day will be rolled out across the country after an agreement made today between the country's energy ministers.

The metres can measure energy consumption in half-hourly intervals.

Different charges can applied by energy companies at different times of the day and consumers can then adjust their usage accordingly.

The technology also enables energy companies to read meters remotely.

Federal Energy Minister Martin Ferguson says by 2017 more than half of the country's old meters will be replaced by smart meters.

"Smart meters can provide major benefits for consumers, empowering them to take control of their energy bills by providing better information, new choices in off-peak pricing to save money, and new services to manage appliances and increase their energy efficiency," he said.

Smart meters may also encourage consumers to use less in high-charge peak periods, taking the strain off power generators during times of high demand, such as in the summer.

"It's not only good from a consumer's point of view but also the point of view of the generators at large - because as you can appreciate we are talking about very significant capital investments," he said.

The rollout will be implemented using a national regulatory approach.

"There will be a common approach to the regulatory issues so as to avoid the 'rail gauge' issues that has occurred in areas of economic activity int he past," Mr Ferguson said.

While the charge of the smart meters to the consumer will be higher on electricity bills, Mr Ferguson expects this to be offset by savings in power costs.

In Victoria the meters are already compulsory and they have also been rolled out across New South Wales.

While the use of the meters are supported by environmental groups such as Greenpeace, who say they make people aware of their carbon footprint, some claim that they lead to higher bills.

Last August, South Australian Energy Minister Pat Conlon told ABC TV's The 7.30 Report he thought smart meters would punish poor people.

But Mr Ferguson says the changes should not leave consumers out of pocket.

"We actually think that we'll get the rollout with very little cost to consumers, but you'll in the process create a consumer benefit if they actually fully utilise these," he said.

"They'll be able to potentially reduce their costs by having better consumer information about the cost of electricity at any given time."

Source: Yahoo Business, http://au.biz.yahoo.com/080613/31/1sbjs.html

26th May, 2008

Award-Winning Western Sydney Companies Revealed

Minister for Western Sydney Barbara Perry unveiled the Winning and Highly Commended companies in the hotly contested 2008 Western Sydney Industry Awards on Friday May 23 at a special presentation event commemorating the Award’s 10th Anniversary.Ms Perry said independent judges selected a total of 22 winners across six major awards – Global Excellence, Excellence in Business Practice, Regional Excellence, Excellence in Innovation, Entrepreneur of the Year and Judges’ Choice.

Regional Excellence
Outstanding Service
Highly Commended - Energy Action Pty Ltd, Parramatta (SME)

Excellence in Innovation
Innovative Product or Service
Winner - Energy Action Pty Ltd, Parramatta (SME)

22nd May, 2008

"Everyone is being asked to conserve energy. Bust asking people to do that without a smart meter is like asking them not to speed without a speedometer"

Bayard's chief executive Cameron O'Reilly, quoted in the AFR this morning, commenting on Bayard's plans to rebrand parent brand, Landis + Gyr, and prepare for a float in 12 to 18 months time. Bayard owns such metering and control system brands as Ampy Email metering, Hunt Technologies, Enermet, Cellnet and Stat Signal.

 

The Australian Financial Review, 22nd May 2008, p.22

 

2nd April, 2008

The federal minister for climate change and water, Penny Wong, last week announced a timetable for introduction of emissions trading.

The timetable includes several important stages, including:

• March to June 2008: preliminary consultations on technical issues with industry and non-government groups
• July 2008: public release of a green paper on emissions trading design, drawing on preliminary consultations
• December 2008: public release of exposure draft legislation
• March - Mid 2009: bill to be considered by parliament
• 2009: consultation on emissions trading regulations;
• 3rd quarter 2009: Act enters into force and regulator set up
• 2010: emissions trading scheme to commence.

The timetable includes four phases of consultation on key design and implementation issues.

“The government will continue to seek input from the public, industry and non-government groups to ensure emissions trading gets the best results at the least cost,” Wong said.

"Consultation is a key part of our methodical approach. An important step will be the release of a Green Paper in early July 2008, to encourage the community and industry to continue offering their ideas on the design and implementation of the scheme.

For more information, see 

http://www.environment.gov.au/minister/wong/2008/pubs/mr20080317.pdf 

1st April, 2008

it seems the press release below is confusing power prices and fuel prices, but it is food for thought nonetheless..

By Josh Robertson, Clinton Porteous and Rosemary Odgers

April 01, 2008 04:27am

20th March, 2008

Professor Ross Garnaut released his discussion paper on an Australian emissions trading scheme (ETS) in Sydney today, stating that the introduction of an ETS signalled the opportunity for profound, long-term structural change for Australia.

"An emissions trading scheme will be the centrepiece of Australia’s climate change policy. If we get the design right, it will help build a more resilient economy for the long term," he said.

The paper argues for the need to design the scheme on the basis that it will ultimately be part of a global agreement on greenhouse gas mitigation.

"A global emissions trading scheme is clearly our end goal. I have looked at all the design issues through the lense of what would allow the most efficient and effective integration with international schemes," said Professor Garnaut.

The paper suggests fixed and clear limits on emissions through the establishment of defined emissions ‘trajectories’, which would transparently map the pathway to emissions reduction targets/commitments. Permits would be regularly released in line with the trajectory.

"A long-term, firm trajectory for emissions reduction – which could only be tightened, not loosened, in line with emerging international commitments – would provide greater investor confidence and strengthen the credibility of the scheme," he said.

Professor Garnaut said that ‘simplicity’ was the key to an effective ETS for Australia.

"Compromises to the simplicity of the ETS should not be made lightly as they inevitably result in increased uncertainty and transaction costs for market participants," the discussion paper says.

The ETS discussion paper supports the auctioning of all permits, arguing that any increase in the price of goods or services, such as energy, will not be prevented through the free allocation of permits.

"Whether permits are allocated freely or auctioned to existing [electricity] generators, the price impact on households will be the same," the discussion paper says.

"The auctioning of permits will generate very large amounts of revenue, and the Government will face many competing demands on how that is used. These will include from households affected by increased prices of goods and services, employees and communities dependent on emissions-intensive industries, and non-traded sectors whose costs are directly impacted," said Professor Garnaut.

"The revenue should be spent on improving the productive or adaptive capacity of the economy, in ways that are consistent with reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

"Special attention must be given to consumers who will ultimately bear the cost of a carbon price, and in particular, low-income households," he said.

The discussion paper supports transitional assistance to trade-exposed emissions intensive industries (such as steel and aluminium manufacturers) who are unable to pass on the cost of a carbon price.

Design features put forward in the paper include:

• Creation of an ‘Independent Carbon Bank’ to monitor and enforce compliance with the scheme.• Auctioning of all permits, in order to maintain the simplicity, credibility and transparency of the scheme.• Allowing the unlimited banking or hoarding of permits, and lending of permits by the Independent Carbon Bank.• No price controls for permits, such as price caps or floors.• Application of a penalty with a make-good provision, for non-compliance.• Making the coverage as broad as possible, with a recommendation to include agriculture and forestry as soon as practicable.• Usage of permit revenue to provide assistance to households, particularly low-income households, and adjustment assistance for communities and employees of impacted sectors.• Provision of transitional assistance to trade-exposed, emissions intensive firms."This reform will cost, but that cost will be manageable if we safeguard the simplicity and credibility of the market and use the proceeds to transition Australia to a low-carbon economy," said Professor Garnaut.

He encouraged Australians to "get interested" in the detail of the emissions trading scheme design, saying the reforms of the following two years would have sweeping implications for the nation.

"The design decisions made in the lead up to 2010 will affect every one of us and I encourage all Australians to take an interest in how the emissions trading scheme is drawn up. I hope that my paper will help stimulate a robust community discussion," he said.

Submissions are invited on the discussion paper by 18 April 2008, which is available at www.garnautreview.org.au

 

From

http://www.garnautreview.org.au/CA25734E0016A131/pages/reports-and-papers